Bump librouteros to 4.1.1

[chemelli74]

Proposed change

changelog: https://github.com/luqasz/librouteros/blob/main/CHANGELOG.rst
diff: luqasz/librouteros@3.2.1...4.1.1

• Fix parse_word edge case
• fix: handle IPv6 correctly when saddr is not specified (Glances sensor #366)
• Fix 'cmd' in kwargs collision
• Handle broken stream errors
• Fix empty select() =.proplist= argument

Code aligned with breaking changes.

Type of change

• Dependency upgrade
• Bugfix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• New integration (thank you!)
• New feature (which adds functionality to an existing integration)
• Deprecation (breaking change to happen in the future)
• Breaking change (fix/feature causing existing functionality to break)
• Code quality improvements to existing code or addition of tests

Additional information

• This PR fixes or closes issue: fixes #
• This PR is related to issue:
• Link to documentation pull request:
• Link to developer documentation pull request:
• Link to frontend pull request:

Checklist

• I understand the code I am submitting and can explain how it works.
• The code change is tested and works locally.
• Local tests pass. Your PR cannot be merged unless tests pass
• There is no commented out code in this PR.
• I have followed the development checklist
• I have followed the perfect PR recommendations
• The code has been formatted using Ruff (ruff format homeassistant tests)
• Tests have been added to verify that the new code works.
• Any generated code has been carefully reviewed for correctness and compliance with project standards.

If user exposed functionality or configuration variables are added/changed:

• Documentation added/updated for www.home-assistant.io

If the code communicates with devices, web services, or third-party tools:

• The manifest file has all fields filled out correctly.
  Updated and included derived files by running: python3 -m script.hassfest.
• New or updated dependencies have been added to requirements_all.txt.
  Updated by running python3 -m script.gen_requirements_all.
• For the updated dependencies a diff between library versions and ideally a link to the changelog/release notes is added to the PR description.

To help with the load of incoming pull requests:

• I have reviewed two other open pull requests in this repository.

[home-assistant]

Hey there @engrbm87, mind taking a look at this pull request as it has been labeled with an integration (mikrotik) you are listed as a code owner for? Thanks!

Code owner commands

Code owners of mikrotik can trigger bot actions by commenting:

• @home-assistant close Closes the pull request.
• @home-assistant mark-draft Mark the pull request as draft.
• @home-assistant ready-for-review Remove the draft status from the pull request.
• @home-assistant rename Awesome new title Renames the pull request.
• @home-assistant reopen Reopen the pull request.
• @home-assistant unassign mikrotik Removes the current integration label and assignees on the pull request, add the integration domain after the command.
• @home-assistant update-branch Update the pull request branch with the base branch.
• @home-assistant add-label needs-more-information Add a label (needs-more-information, problem in dependency, problem in custom component, problem in config, problem in device, feature-request) to the pull request.
• @home-assistant remove-label needs-more-information Remove a label (needs-more-information, problem in dependency, problem in custom component, problem in config, problem in device, feature-request) on the pull request.

[coderabbitai]

Caution

Review failed

An error occurred during the review process. Please try again later.

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.}

[coderabbitai]

Caution

Review failed

An error occurred during the review process. Please try again later.

✨ Finishing Touches

🧪 Generate unit tests (beta)

• Create PR with unit tests

---

Thanks for using CodeRabbit! It's free for OSS, and your support helps us grow. If you like it, consider giving us a shout-out.

❤️ Share

• X
• Mastodon
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

_{Comment @coderabbitai help to get the list of available commands.}

[github-actions]

Check requirements

Checked at commit 88ab964.

⚠️ Some checks require attention — see the details below.

Package	Old	New	No Advisories	Not Yanked	Repo Public	CI Upload	Release Pipeline	Security	PR Link	Async Safe
librouteros	3.2.1	4.1.1	✅	✅	✅	⚠️	✅	☑️	✅	✅

📦 librouteros: 3.2.1 → 4.1.1

• No Advisories: ✅ No active advisories reported by PyPI for version 4.1.1.
• Not Yanked: ✅ Version 4.1.1 is a live (non-yanked) release.
• Repo Public: ✅ https://github.com/luqasz/librouteros is publicly accessible.
• CI Upload: ⚠️ No PEP 740 provenance attestation present on PyPI. Upload method cannot be verified from PyPI alone.
• Release Pipeline: ✅ OIDC publish via uv publish triggered on tag push with environment: release guard.
• Security: ☑️ Baseline scan found nothing obvious in pyproject.toml, src/librouteros/__init__.py, src/librouteros/connections.py, src/librouteros/login.py. This is not a security review — only the cheap checks were run.
• PR Link: ✅ PR description links to compare URL luqasz/librouteros@3.2.1...4.1.1 mentioning both 3.2.1 and 4.1.1.
• Async Safe: ✅ No new blocking calls introduced in 3.2.1 → 4.1.1.

Generated by Check requirements (AW) · 113.5 AIC · ⌖ 29.8 AIC · ⊞ 29.9K · ◷

[abmantis]

This is marked as bugfix. Can you detail what is being fixed in the PR description?

[chemelli74]

This is marked as bugfix. Can you detail what is being fixed in the PR description?

Isn't the link to changelog enough ?

[joostlek]

This is marked as bugfix. Can you detail what is being fixed in the PR description?

Isn't the link to changelog enough ?

No that's for the dependency bump, but this was marked as bugfix, but the PR doesn't describe what its fixing, so Abilio is curious if this was a mistake or that it's fixing something and should be taken into beta

[chemelli74]

This is marked as bugfix. Can you detail what is being fixed in the PR description?

Isn't the link to changelog enough ?

No that's for the dependency bump, but this was marked as bugfix, but the PR doesn't describe what its fixing, so Abilio is curious if this was a mistake or that it's fixing something and should be taken into beta

Humm, I don't get teh point.

The new library version fixes a few issues which is the reason why I marked the bump as a bugfix.
Some devices with new firmware doesn't work with library 3.x.
Didn't investigate too much why, but tested here with my device and confirm new one works fine.

[abmantis]

This is marked as bugfix. Can you detail what is being fixed in the PR description?

Isn't the link to changelog enough ?

No that's for the dependency bump, but this was marked as bugfix, but the PR doesn't describe what its fixing, so Abilio is curious if this was a mistake or that it's fixing something and should be taken into beta

Humm, I don't get teh point.

The new library version fixes a few issues which is the reason why I marked the bump as a bugfix. Some devices with new firmware doesn't work with library 3.x. Didn't investigate too much why, but tested here with my device and confirm new one works fine.

Every dependency bump has a link to the changelog, but not every dependency bump is marked as a bugfix.
If the author actively marks the PR as a bugfix, it means the author knows that something is being fixed. That should be described in the PR to "justify" the label.

Otherwise, don't mark it as bugfix.

[joostlek]

I am not sure how consistent we are with that. I do think it would make it better if we'd be stricter, but if I open a diff and see a bugfix in the comments in a way that would affect the integration I'd already be fine, but that's not water tight of course

[chemelli74]

This is the way I always created the bump PR and it was always accepted ;-)
I feel like sometimes we get lost in the small details and lose sight of the bigger picture.

Anyway, let's move on; details added.

Can I merge the changes?

[abmantis]

This is the way I always created the bump PR and it was always accepted ;-) I feel like sometimes we get lost in the small details and lose sight of the bigger picture.

Anyway, let's move on; details added.

Can I merge the changes?

Ofc :) I approved it, so it LGTM! I commented because I would like some more details on the PR body, but that was not blocking.

Thanks for adding it.